User talk:Reqυiem

Nice work at the AC2 page. You're being watched. -- D. Cello 02:35, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Ever heard of the Istruttori? We want you in.-- D. Cello 20:24, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

Istruttori Guild

Welcome to the Istruttori.
You now have the honor to use a Istruttore Badge on your profile, just insert {{ist}} on top of the page, and/or {{UserIst}} to your userbox gallery.
Information about your duties and a list of fellow companions of the team can be acessed at the Istruttori project page. As a Istruttore, you also have acess to the rollback function, which allows you to revert vandalisms or bad-faith edits with one click, on a quickier and pratical way. Safety and peace. -- D. Cello 20:37, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

Don't know if you saw it, but you've been added to the staff page. Guess you liked your picture?
Btw, you plan on revamping the AC article? Up to Featured status like you did to AC2's? XD -- D. Cello 02:55, January 24, 2010 (UTC)

Hahaha. Yes, I liked my picture and I'm working on the AC page. I'm moving out of my apartment right now into a new one (or in the process) so my Internet time is limited to usually right before I head to bed. XD -- Reqυiem 01:49, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

Guys, I'll say once again: we need revamp on Giovanni and Lucy page (for starters). You're the upholders of awesomeness in this wiki, let's work on those articles ASAP! -- D. Cello 15:39, February 10, 2010 (UTC)

People, vote. We have nominations going for mre than a week and less than 3 votes in there. As istruttori, as moderators of this wiki, your votes are REQUIRED. So please, access the bloody page, damn it! -- D. Cello 02:26, February 12, 2010 (UTC)

Okay Istruttori, you probably realized that I'm putting some real time on making userboxes (it's almost a new useless sunday hobbie), and now you have one too! Just add {{UserIst}} to your userbox gallery. And remeber to check the vote page regularly. -- D. Cello 23:33, February 19, 2010 (UTC)

POE Article

Pretty similar to the current one in general formatting, but what little improvement you've made already looks cleaner. Keep up, Requiem. ;] -- D. Cello 01:55, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

I trust your abilities, and moving your version to the POE can cause edit-conflicts if someone changes it while your revamp is in progress. If you don't mind other users editing while you work on the page, go ahead and move it. Your call. -- D. Cello 03:01, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

Amazing work on POE, Req oO
Don't you wanna make a nom for it to Featured or Good status?? -- D. Cello 17:26, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

By the way, your AC page might also earn a status, nominate it too ;D -- D. Cello 17:27, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

Nominated both. Let's see what happens. :) -- Reqυiem 18:27, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

Civilians / Peasants

Hi there~ wondering if you can merge Civilians and Peasants to "Civilians"? Since you're better at writing articles, perhaps you can do it better too XD - SilverSummoner^TaLk 05:58, January 30, 2010 (UTC)

I'll get right on it. :) --Reqυiem 22:43, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

Linage

Just because the developers called it a prequel that doesn't make it one. It doesn't fit the definition of a prequel it should not be called one.

G33k1nd159153 23:01, February 8, 2010 (UTC)

If the owner of the franchise, the ones who created and hold every right to it call it a prequel, then we abide to that. And teoretically, it started production after ACII, and it is a satellite product of a main installment. Definition-speaking, it's a prequel. -- D. Cello 01:46, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

It does not fit the definition of a prequel. A prequel is something that comes out after the original media but on a timeline would be before. In this case it takes place before and was released almost a week before the game. It can not be considered a prequel being released in such a way. I understand it was called a prequel officially but that doesn't make it fit the definition. If the developers misspoke or did not know the difference that is fine but the word we are using to describe it is misleading and wrong. I merely wish to reword it so that the error is gone while still keeping the intended meaning. I see no problem not being one-hundred percent official in this case. If you can give me a better case other than it is official or give an example of how this wiki stays absolutely official with every detail I will drop this.G33k1nd159153 05:33, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

Re:PoE

Woo-hoo~ that's a lot better than the current PoE page we have! :D you deserve a medal for this! *gives medal*. - SilverSummoner^TaLk 03:13, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

Nice! Just 2 things to keep in mind for your sandbox:

1. In the "Possible Temple locations" section, there is a part there that refers to similarities between the PoE. I think this should be moved to "Characteristics".
2. Is there any way to tidy up "Possible Temple locations" and "Locations of the Artifacts"?

Other than that, I commend you for your awesome rewrite. --Silver Mage Ω 05:24, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I haven't nearly finished rewriting the article yet, so the "locations of the artifacts" section will definitely be getting a rewrite as well. I've been thinking about the Temple locations and honestly wonder if maybe it should be in its own article, dedicated specifically to the temples. Thoughts? -- Reqυiem 20:59, February 10, 2010 (UTC)

What temples? o.o -- D. Cello 21:17, February 10, 2010 (UTC)

Minerva refers to "Temples" left around the world, the Vault being one of them. They really have no relevance to the POE and yet speculated locations of them are listed on the POE page. Personally, I think there should be a separate article for that. -- Reqυiem 21:19, February 10, 2010 (UTC)

Split it in two articles. -- D. Cello 21:37, February 10, 2010 (UTC)

I've tried a number of ways to tidy of the possible POE locations and it just seems nearly impossible unless I delete all of the details and just list the proposed locations. Since the articles are supposed to be about fact, perhaps we can just move the proposed locations to the Discussion area of the POE page? Thoughts? -- Reqυiem 22:17, February 10, 2010 (UTC)

my change

i still belive that my change was correct since when lucy searched the animus for the closest common ancestor of desmond and subjekt 16 she found ezio auditore that means that after that he must have had atleast two children since if the line wuold have split later in time she would have found a different ancestor. and the line does not even split up on the death of an ancestor as shown in AC2 the line splits up when the generation move on as shown during the chase scene with Altaïr, he had sex with maria then there is no more memory in Desmonds DNA. Ezio must therefor have had atleast two children since he is the lst common ancestor of DEsmond and Subjekt 16.

Sorry if my spelling isnt correct everwhere in this text/DBlade 23:32, February 13, 2010 (UTC)